![Perhaps he's smiling because he knows that soon he will be able to print "high capacity" magazines, D.C.'s oppressive laws notwithstanding](http://cdn2-b.examiner.com/sites/default/files/styles/image_content_width/hash/34/19/3419ecb5d08b0ccec7bf554236802816.jpg?itok=I0rkRcEb "Perhaps he's smiling because he knows that soon he will be able to print "high capacity" magazines, D.C.'s oppressive laws notwithstanding")
A frequent topic here at St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner is the likelihood that the technology-fueled growth in the ease of improvising effective firearms will soon render "gun control" irrelevant. More specifically, as 3-D printing technology rapidly becomes both more sophisticated and more readily available to middle class consumers, and groups like Defense Distributed develop designs for "printable" guns that will be made freely available on the Internet, gun bans will eventually require Internet bans to have any faint hope of posing any real obstacle to those seeking to bust a "government monopoly on force."
Meanwhile, forcible citizen disarmament advocates willing (for now) to set their sights a bit lower realize that banning magazines of an arbitrarily designated "high" capacity is a more attainable goal than banning the most popular centerfire rifles in the country, and are concentrating on that angle. Representative Carolyn "What's a Barrel Shroud?" McCarthy (D-NY) and Diana DeGette (D-CO) have introduced H.R. 138 (text not yet available) to do just that. Oddly, NBC News is calling this a "new" tactic, as if the (now long dead) federal "assault weapons" ban, which also banned eleven-round and larger magazines, did not go into effect nearly two decades ago.
While "printing" so-called "assault weapons" is not quite ready for prime time--but getting closer every day (see sidebar video)--printing effective magazines is even closer. Consumer grade 3-D printers currently operate with plastic, rather than metal, which poses some difficulties in manufacturing effective firearms. Magazines, on the other hand, are a different story. Soldiers and Marines in combat zones overseas have bought thousands of MagPul's plastic-bodied "PMAGs" with their own money, in preference to the government issued metal magazines.
Some "anti-magazine Democrats" are so eager to send people (people who are not anti-gun media talking heads, anyway) to prison for possessing 11-round magazines that they are willing to sacrifice nuclear power plant safety in pursuit of that agenda--an agenda heading rapidly toward utter irrelevance. It would be amusing, if it were not so pathetic.
See also:
- So . . . how do they intend to ban this?
- "The Third Wave, CNC, Stereolithography, and the end of gun control."
- Proscribed Printables
- What if the revolution that ends 'gun control' is a technological one?
- Why we need 'high capacity' magazines: Because there are more than 10 Democrats
- Guess he scared the excrement out of somebody. (Or, more likely, the ATF did it for him.)
- No Bother at All
- Defense Distributed Frequently Asked Questions
- Defense Distributed Manifesto (gotta like that)
- An arms factory in every home: Gun control fights against its inevitable demise
- CSGV becoming increasingly frantic over 'printable gun'
- Government will push back against home manufactured guns
- Well, that wasn't optimal. Wouldn't a perfectly good zip gun -- or a Liberator -- work better, easier and surely cheaper?
- Printed gun fails after 6 shots: 'Ma Deuce' wasn't built (or printed) in a day*
- 'Plastic gun' ban would make even less sense now than in 1988
- IL Dems think 11-round magazines more dangerous than outdated nuclear plants
Comments